Activism is big right now. We are in a time where social activism is as popular as it was in the 60’s and maybe even more so. This sometimes creates a problem in the journalism field.
The point of journalism is to keep the government in check and make sure that the people know what is going on. With that said, sometimes in times when social activism is so prevalent, the line between journalism and activism gets blurred.
One person who personifies the struggle to define a person as an activist or a journalist is Glenn Greenwald. Greenwald is, of course, known for reporting all of the government secrets discovered by Edward Snowden in The Guardian.
An article about Greenwald in The New York Times pointed out that he is, in fact, both a journalist and an activist. In some cases, an activist has to be a journalist or at least know a journalist to make their views known.
Everyone knows that Snowden choosing to give the information that he gathered to Greenwald was not a random idea. He chose Greenwald specifically because he believed that Greenwald was a safe bet based on his writing.
With that said, in some cases, being an activist in the journalism field may even help you get stories. Showing that you have an opinion and that you aren’t afraid to voice that opinion may not be as bad as we are taught.
Especially in a time when independent and citizen journalism is gaining in popularity, who is to say that any activist who publishes his or her ideas is not a journalist. Is there even a definition of “journalist” anymore?
As someone studying to be able to call myself a “journalist” I sure hope that the word is definable; and it may be, but we at least have to accept that the definition is changing.
That changing definition can now include other words like activist. It is no longer against the rules to share your opinion as a journalist. Of course, you have to be sharing it in the right setting, but regardless, publishing opinion used to be completely against the rules. Objectivity has been almost traded in for transparency. As long as you can cite your sources and show the audience exactly where you are getting your information, than you are good.
As long as the journalist does not get byline happy and publish any activism that they find then it is fine. We do have to remember sometimes that publishing about a cause just to publish about it is not the same as reporting what the public needs to know. Understand the significance of what you are reporting and make sure that what you are publishing is something that people need to know and that you are not just publishing it to get into the fight.
So, when it comes to the line between a journalist and an activist maybe it is not a terrible thing that the line is becoming less and less discernible. In my opinion, if there is something that the public needs to know and a journalist is willing to publish it, then you are welcome to call them an activist, but you also have to call them what they are: a journalist.
Our job is to “seek the truth and report it,” if that makes us activists then so be it.
Sarah Ploss 